Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29983748›Full record

Trial reportJournal of foot and ankle research2018

An anatomically-based masking protocol for the assessment of in-shoe plantar pressure measurement of the forefoot.

Saeed Forghany, Daniel R Bonanno, Hylton B Menz, Karl B Landorf

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Saeed Forghany1Musculoskeletal Research Centre, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Daniel R Bonanno3Discipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086 Australia.
Hylton B Menz3Discipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086 Australia.
Karl B Landorf3Discipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086 Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3882-5206
La Trobe University · AUIsfahan University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe area beneath the metatarsal heads is a common location of foot pain, which is often associated with high plantar pressures. Current plantar pressure assessment protocols focus mainly on the gross area of the forefoot with minimal attention paid to specific areas such as the metatarsal heads. The aim of this study was to develop and assess a new anatomically-based masking protocol that is clinically relevant to measure forefoot plantar pressure during shod conditions based on the anatomical positions of the metatarsal heads.

methodsInitially, we developed a masking protocol to measure forefoot plantar pressure during shod conditions based on the anatomical positions of the metatarsal heads. This new masking protocol divided the forefoot into three sub-areas (proximal, beneath, and distal to the metatarsal heads) as determined by the position of each metatarsal head. Following development of the new masking protocol, we compared the new protocol against a traditional protocol, which defines the forefoot as between 51 and 81% of the foot length. To compare the two masking protocols, we tested two experimental conditions: (i) a control condition (i.e. no metatarsal pad), and (ii) a metatarsal pad condition. We then compared plantar pressure differences between the two experimental conditions for the two masking protocols. Participants for this component of the study included 36 community dwelling older adults (mean age 75.6 years ±5.4) with a history of forefoot pain. Forefoot plantar pressure data were measured while walking using the pedar

resultsThe traditional masking protocol showed that the metatarsal pad significantly decreased peak pressure and increased contact area in the forefoot area (i.e. within the entire mask area), but maximum force was not significantly different between the two conditions. In contrast, the newly developed anatomically-based masking protocol indicated that the metatarsal pad decreased peak plantar pressures distal to and beneath the metatarsal heads by increasing force and contact area proximal to the metatarsal heads.

conclusionsAn anatomically-based masking protocol that is clinically relevant was developed to assess forefoot plantar pressure during shod conditions based on the anatomical positions of metatarsal heads. We propose that the new forefoot masking protocol will provide greater interpretability of forefoot plantar pressure data, which will aid clinicians and researchers for diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic purposes.

Indexed as

Foot OrthosesAgedAged, 80 and overClinical ProtocolsEquipment DesignFemaleForefoot, HumanHumansMaleMetatarsal BonesPainPressureShoesSingle-Blind MethodWeight-BearingForefootGaitKineticsOrthotic devices

Identifiers

PMID29983748
PMCPMC6003026
OpenAlexW2808548175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.